alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
G. Brad Beckstead
Certified Public Accountant
                                                      330 E. Warm Springs Rd.
                                                          Las Vegas, NV 89119
                                                                 702.257.1984
                                                             702.362.0540 fax




September 5, 2002

Securities and Exchange Commission
Washington, D.C. 20549

Ladies and Gentlemen:

I  was previously principal accountant for Petrol Oil and Gas, Inc. (formerly
Euro  Technology  Outfitters) (the "Company") and reported on  the  financial
statements  of  the Company for the years ended December 31, 2001  and  2000.
Effective  August  20,  2002,  my appointment  as  principal  accountant  was
terminated.  I have read the Company's statements included under  Item  4  of
its  Form 8-K dated August 19, 2002, and I agree with such statements, except
that I am not in a position to agree or disagree with the Company's statement
that  the  change  was approved by the Board of Directors or  that  Weaver  &
Martin,  LLC was not engaged regarding any matter requiring disclosure  under
Regulation S-K, Item 304(a)(2).

Very truly yours,

/s/ G. Brad Beckstead, CPA
G. Brad Beckstead, CPA
<PAGE>

                                                                   Exhibit 10.30

                     Selling Agent Agreement Amendment No. 1

      This Amendment No. 1 to Selling Agent Agreement is made as of the 14th day
of May, 2004 by and between GunnAllen Financial, Inc., 1715 N. Westshore Blvd.,
Suite 700, Tampa, Florida 33607 ("GAF") and Redline Performance Products, Inc.,
2510 Commerce Way, Vista, CA 92083 ("Redline").

      Reference is made to that certain Selling Agent Agreement between GAF and
Redline dated as of April 20, 2004 ("Original Agreement"). All terms not
otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings ascribed to such terms in the
Original Agreement.

      For lawful and valid consideration, GAF and Redline hereby agree as
follows:

      1.    GAF hereby accepts warrants to purchase 50,000 shares of Redline
Common Stock with an exercise price of $1.75 per share in lieu of the Selling
Agent Warrants described in Section 5(b) of the Original Agreement. All other
terms of the Selling Agent Agreement shall remain in effect. The form of Selling
Agent Warrant is attached to this Amendment No. 1.

      2.    The terms of the Offering have been amended as described in the
Amendment No. 1 dated May 14, 2004 to the Common Stock Purchase Agreement dated
as of April 21, 2004 delivered by Redline to investors in the Offering.

      3.    Except as provided herein, all other terms and conditions of the
Original Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.

ACCEPTED AND AGREED:

GUNNALLEN FINANCIAL, INC.                     REDLINE PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS, INC.

By: /s/ Donald J. Gunn                        By: /s/ Mark A. Payne
    -----------------------                      -------------------------------
Name:  Donald J. Gunn                         Name:  Mark A. Payne
Title: President                              Title: President and CFO
<PAGE>

                                                                Exhibit 23.1

                          CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


    We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements 
No. 2-93079 of Zycad Corporation on Form S-8, and No. 33-12170, No. 33-36124 
and No. 333-08089 on Form S-3 of our reports (which express an unqualified 
opinion and include an explanatory paragraph relating to an uncertainty of 
the Company's ability to continue as a going concern) dated March 11, 1997 
(April 14, 1997 as to the last paragraph of Note 5 and as to Note 11), 
appearing in and incorporated by reference in the Annual Report of Form 10-K 
of Zycad Corporation for the year ended December 31, 1996.

DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

San Jose, California
April 14, 1997



                                      23
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED

April 3, 2003

Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-41115 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

RAFAEL GRACIA GUERRERO,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas

(B-00-CR-514-1-S)

Before BARKSDALE, DeMOSS, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Rafael Gracia Guerrero appeals his con viction, following a

jury trial, for bank robbery. 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) & (d) (taking

money with force, violence or intimidation from a bank). In

contending the district court erred in denying his motion for a

judgment of acquittal, Guerrero claims insufficient evidence

proving his identity as one of the bank robbers. There was

evidence: Guerrero was a major contributor of DN A to a ski mask

found at the bank; he participated in robberies with similar m odus2

operandi ; and his behavior upon being stopped for a traffic

violation indicated a guilty conscience. Viewed in the light most

favorable to the government, a rational jury could have found,

beyond a reasonable doubt, that Guerrero was one of the bank

robbers. E .g., United States v. Edwards
, 303 F. 3d 606, 635 (5th

Cir. 2002), cert. denied,

__ S.Ct. __, 71 U.S.L.W. 3430 (24 Feb.

2003).

Guerrero also contends the district court erred by admitting

claimed hearsay testimony discrediting his alibi. Even if the

testimony were hearsay, given the evidence of Guerrero’s guilt, the

admission constituted harmless error. E.g., Edwards , 303 F.3d at

623.

AFFIRMED
EXHIBIT 21

SUBSIDIARIES OF REGISTRANT



|                                                                     |  |                                  |  
|-------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | -------------------------------- | -
|Name and State or other Jurisdiction of Incorporation                |  | RegistrantsPercentage Ownership |  
|U. S. Subsidiaries                                                   |  |                                  |  
|C/P Products Corp, an Indiana corporation                            |  | 100                              | %
|United Sales and Warehouse of Texas, Inc., a Texas corporation       |  | 100                              | %
|                                                                     | 
|Foreign Subsidiaries:                                                |  |                                  |  
|The Coast Distribution System (Canada) Inc., Quebec, Canada          |  | 100                              | %
|Ai-wek a.k.a Eurasia Recreational Vehicle Accessories Taiwan Company |  | 100                              | %

In accordance with the instructions set forth in Paragraph (b) of Item 601 of Regulation
S-K, there have been omitted those subsidiaries that, if considered in the aggregate as a single subsidiary, would not have constituted a significant subsidiary as of December 31, 2005.
EXHIBIT 99.3
                   CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

The Company's management, including the Chief Executive Officer and
Chief Financial Officer conducted an evaluation of the Company's
disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days of the
filing of this report on Form 10-QSB. Based on that evaluation, the
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have determined
that such controls and procedures are designed to ensure that
material information relating to the Company, is made known to them,
particularly during the period in which this Form 10-QSB was being
prepared. There have been no significant changes in the Company's
internal controls or in other factors that could significantly
affect internal controls subsequent to the date of their evaluation.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

CARMEN DE OLIVEIRA INTEGLIA,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 09-10087

D.C. No. 3:07-CR-00088-LRH

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Nevada

Larry R. Hicks, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted May 24, 2011** 

Before: PREGERSON, THOMAS, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

Carmen de Oliveira Integlia appeals from her guilty-plea conviction and 18-

month sentence for mail fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1341. Pursuant to

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Oliveira Integlia’s counsel has filed a

brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as

FILED

MAY 27 2011

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 09-10087

counsel of record. We have provided the appellant with the opportunity to file a

pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has

been filed.

Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S.

75, 80-81 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal.

Accordingly, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the district

court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### Health Resources and Services Administration

# AGENCY:

Health Resources and Services Administration; Department of Health and Human Services.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting cancellation.

# SUMMARY:

This is to notify the public that the March 25-26, 2024, meeting of the Advisory Committee on Training in Primary Care Medicine and Dentistry is cancelled.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Shane Rogers, Designated Federal Officer, Advisory Committee on Training in Primary Care Medicine and Dentistry, 5600 Fishers Lane, Room 15N142, Rockville, Maryland 20857, telephone: (301) 443-5260 or email:                         *srogers@hrsa.gov.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    This meeting was announced in the                     **Federal Register**                     on Friday, December 15, 2023 (88 FR 86909). Future meetings will be held on August 2, 2024, and another date this calendar year that will be announced at least 30 days before the meeting date through the                     **Federal Register**                    .                

Maria G. Button,

Director, Executive Secretariat.

[FR Doc. 2024-03261 Filed 2-15-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4165-15-P
**Exhibit 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEFEXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEYACT OF 2002

 

I, John R. Cooper,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of AvocentCorporation on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 29, 2006fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form 10-Q fairlypresents in all material respects the financial condition and results ofoperations of Avocent Corporation.
| Date:  | November 7, 2006 |                    |   |   |
|--------|------------------|-------------------------|--------|--------|
|   | By:              | /s/ John R. Cooper      |   |   |
|   | Name:            | John R. Cooper          |
|   | Title:           | Chief Executive Officer |
|        |                  |                         |        |        |  |  |  |  |

 

I, Edward H.Blankenship, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuantto Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report ofAvocent Corporation on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 29,2006 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition andresults of operations of Avocent Corporation.
| Date:  | November 7, 2006 |                                                                                |   |   |
|--------|------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|
|   | By:              | /s/ Edward H. Blankenship                                                           |   |   |
|   | Name:            | Edward H. Blankenship                                                               |
|   | Title:           | Senior Vice President of Finance, Chief Financial  Officer, and Assistant Secretary |
|        |                  |                                                                                     |        |        |  |  |  |  |

 

----
#### Bill MALONE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 28296.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 2, 1956.

'No attorney on appeal for appellant.

Leon B. Douglas, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

PER CURIAM.

The unlawful possession of whisky for sale in a dry area is the offense, with a prior conviction for an offense of like character. The punishment is assessed at a fine of $400.

The record on appeal contains no statement of facts or bills of exception. All proceedings appear to be regular. Nothing is presented for review.

The judgment is affirmed.
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1543 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to count a period of receipt 

of outpatient observation services in a hospital toward satisfying the 

3-day inpatient hospital requirement for coverage of skilled nursing facility services under Medicare. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 14, 2011 

Mr. COURTNEY (for himself and Mr. LATHAM) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of 

such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to count 

a period of receipt of outpatient observation services 

in a hospital toward satisfying the 3-day inpatient hospital requirement for coverage of skilled nursing facility 

services under Medicare. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Improving Access to 

5 Medicare Coverage Act of 2011’’. 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1543 IH

1 SEC. 2. COUNTING A PERIOD OF RECEIPT OF OUTPATIENT 

2 OBSERVATION SERVICES IN A HOSPITAL TO3 WARD THE 3-DAY INPATIENT HOSPITAL RE4 QUIREMENT FOR COVERAGE OF SKILLED 

5 NURSING FACILITY SERVICES UNDER MEDI6 CARE. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1861(i) of the Social Se8 curity Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x(i)) is amended by adding at 

9 the end the following: ‘‘For purposes of this subsection, 

10 an individual receiving outpatient observation services 

11 shall be deemed to be an inpatient during such period, 

12 and the date such individual ceases receiving such services 

13 shall be deemed the hospital discharge date (unless such 

14 individual is admitted as a hospital inpatient at the end 

15 of such period).’’. 

16 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

17 subsection (a) shall apply to receipt of outpatient observa18 tion services beginning on or after January 1, 2011, but 

19 applies to a period of post-hospital extended care services 

20 that was completed before the date of the enactment of 

21 this Act only if an administrative appeal is or has been 

22 made with respect to such services not later than 90 days 

23 after the date of the enactment of this Act. Notwith24 standing any other provision of law, the Secretary of 

25 Health and Human Services may implement such amendVerDate Mar 15 2010 02:54 Apr 19, 2011 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H1543.IH H1543

jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 1543 IH

1 ment through an interim final regulation, program in2 struction, or otherwise. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
#### STATE OF CONNECTICUT *v.*GEORGE J. OLSZEWSKI

(14285)

Foti, Landau and Heiman, Js.

Argued February 20

decision released March 26, 1996

*Joseph S. Elder,*with whom, on the brief, was *Kirstin B. Coffin,*for the appellant (defendant).

*Denise B. Smoker,*deputy assistant state’s attorney with whom were *James E. Thomas,*state’s attorney, and, on the brief, *Cynthia Baer,*supervisory assistant state’s attorney, for the appellee (state).

PER CURIAM.

The defendant appeals from the judgment of conviction rendered by the court, following the acceptance of his plea of nolo contendere1 to the charge of operating a motor vehicle while his license was under suspension in violation of General Statutes § 14-215 (c). The defendant challenges the trial court’s denial of his motion to dismiss.2 He claims that the trial court *725improperly found that the arrest occurred within the proper jurisdiction of the arresting officer. We are unable to determine what the court found as the record lacks any facts or findings. The defendant has failed to present a written memorandum of decision or a transcribed copy of an oral decision signed by the court explaining the factual basis for its decision in denying the motion as required by Practice Book § 4059. It is the appellant’s responsibility to provide an adequate record for review. Practice Book § 4061; *Gelormino*v. *Blaustein,*31 Conn. App. 750, 751, 626 A.2d 1325 (1993); *State*v. *Rios,*30 Conn. App. 712, 715, 622 A.2d 618 (1993).

The judgment is affirmed.

1

 The defendant entered a conditional plea of nolo contendere pursuant to General Statutes § 54-94a and Practice Book § 4003.

2

 The motion to dismiss alleged that “the stop and search of his person were illegal and in violation of [his] rights under the state and federal constitutions . . . .”
#### The Mercer Casualty Co., Appellee, *v.*Plunkett et al., Appellants.

(No. 27620

Decided June 14, 1939.)

*Messrs. Lynch, Day, Pontius & Lynch*and *Messrs. Henhel S Gongwer,*for appellee.

*Mr. John D. Gardner, Mr. Ralph Levinson, Mr. Hugo Alexander, Mr. Hugo Ghestoshy*and *Mr. Stuart B. Moreland,*for appellants.

It is ordered and adjudged that said appeal as of right he, and the same hereby is, dismissed for the reason no debatable constitutional question is involved in said cause.

*Appeal dismissed.*

Weygandt, C. J., Day, Zimmerman, Williams, Matthias and Hart, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 24.1



                               POWER OF ATTORNEY



     Each person whose signature appears below constitutes and appoints Raymond
M. Curran and Patrick J. Moore, and each of them, his true and lawful attorney-
in-fact and agent, with full power of substitution and resubstitution, for him
and in his name, place and stead, in any and all capacities, to sign Annual
Reports on Form 10-K and all required interim reports and to file the same, with
all exhibits thereto, and other documents in connection therewith, regarding
JSCE, Inc., a Delaware corporation, with the Securities and Exchange Commission
and any other regulatory authority, granting unto said attorney-in-fact and
agents, full power and authority to do and perform each and every act and thing
requisite and necessary to be done in and about the premises, as fully to all
intents and purposes as he might or could do in person, hereby ratifying and
confirming all that said attorneys-in-fact and agents, or their substitutes, may
lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.


        Signature                                     Title
----------------------------          ------------------------------------------


/s/ Raymond M. Curran                 President, Chief Executive Officer
----------------------------          and Director (Principal Executive
Raymond M. Curran                     Officer)


/s/ Patrick J. Moore                  Vice President, Chief Financial Officer
----------------------------          (Principal Accounting Officer and
Patrick J. Moore                      Principal Financial Officer) and Director





Date:  February 23, 2001
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT UNITED STATES OF AM ERIC A, Plaintiff - Appe lle e , v. JESUS M ENESES-LOPEZ, De fe nda

nt - Appe lla

nt. No. 12-10387

D.C . No. 2:11-c r-02270-R OS M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the Distric t of Ariz o na R osly n O. Silve r, Distric t Judge , Pre s iding Subm itte d De c e m

be r 17, 2013 ** B e fore : GOODW IN, WALLAC E, a nd GR AB ER , C irc uit Judge s. Je sus M e n e se s-Lope za

ppe a ls from

the distric t c ourt’ s judgm e nt a nd c ha lle nge s the 57-m onth se nte n c e im pose d following his guilty -ple a c onvic tion for re e ntry of a re m ove d a l ie n, in viola

tion of 8 U.S.C . § 1326. W e have jurisdic tion unde r 28 U.S.C . § 1291, a n d we a ffirm . 

# FIL ED D EC 18 2013 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U
. S
. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without oral a

rgum e nt. Se eFe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).M e ne se s -Lope z c onte nds tha t the distric t c ourt proc e dura lly e rre d by fa iling to re c ogniz e its disc re tion to va ry downwa rd from the Guide line ran ge ba se d upon polic y grounds under K

i mbrough v . Unite d State

s , 552 U.S. 85 (2007). The re c ord be lie s this c onte nt ion. Thedistric t c o urt re c ogniz e d, but c h ose not to e xe rc ise , its K imbrough disc re t i on to va ry from the Guide l ine s. Se eUnite d State s v . Ay alaN ic anor , 659 F.3d 744, 752-53 (9th C ir. 2011). M e ne se s -Lope z a lso a

rgue s tha t his se nte nc e is substa

ntive ly unre a sona

ble in light of the

a ge of his 1998 fe lony

c onvic tion a

nd othe r m itiga

ting fa c tors. The distric t c o urt did not a

buse its disc re tion in im

posing M e ne se s-Lope z ’ s se nte nc e . Se eGall v . Unite d

State s , 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The se nte nc e at the bottom

of the Guide line s ra

n ge is substa

ntive ly re a sona ble in light of the 18 U.S.C . § 3553(a) se nte nc ing fa c t ors a

nd the tota lity

of the c irc um s ta

nc e s, inc luding M e ne se sLope z ’ s ove ra ll c rim ina l history and the ne e d for de te rre n c e and prote c tion of the public . Se eid . AFFIRM E D.

1 2 - 1 0 3 8 7 2